Without getting arrested?

I seriously don't think it's fair that men can show their nipples in public and women can't. How would I protest this and get the laws changed without getting arrested? I was thinking if I have a large enough group of people... or is there a petition I can create? What would be the fastest way? HOW DO I DO IT?!

5/3/2009 2:03:39 PM

Im just curious, and i dont mean any offense in this, but why is it a big deal to you?

5/3/2009 2:08:12 PM

i just thought genitals had to be covered

5/3/2009 2:09:05 PM

Actually, she has a pretty good point. The fact that men's and women's nipples are treated differently, under the law, is based purely on cultural norms that have no logical underpinnings, as far as I know. In fact, if we weren't raised to believe that breasts were a shameful thing that should never be viewed except under certain circumstances, we'd have a completely different view of it.

Perhaps men, from all different backgrounds are cultures, are inherently attracted to breasts and/or nipples. Being able to view them whenever would be a distraction, and could substantially slow the progress of societies. Someone may have figured this out very early in civilization, and suggested that the breasts be covered so the guys could actually get some work done. That's a theory, at least.

The argument is generally going to be that people don't want kids seeing nipples/breasts. Why? Because that's just how it is. How exactly does a hurt a child to see breasts? No one knows, and no one cares. Like I said, this is not something that could very easily be changed.

5/3/2009 2:20:40 PM

^^Because I was walking along on campus one day, and its gorgeous out and I just wanted to feel the sun on my skin, and I realized I couldn't do that like a guy can, couldn't just take off my shirt and bra. And it's just not fair.

And I realized, it's really fucking ridiculous that showing nipples is illegal for women and not for men.


^Breasts are only distracting because they've been so sexualized. All those tribes where women can walk around naked and the men aren't that distracted. It's like saying women are distracting because men can see more than their eyes and hands. The more you make it forbidden, the more sexual it seems.



[Edited on May 3, 2009 at 2:26 PM. Reason : dfs]

5/3/2009 2:23:07 PM

I agree with this cause

5/3/2009 2:36:36 PM

It's all about context. Nude beaches and The Painted Cyclists of Seattle are both examples of acceptable public nudity.

To answer your question: do you have the time and money to make this an issue in the courts? Can you create a circumstance that would allow yourself to 'make a stand'?

It would be difficult in North Carolina, since it would probably come down to what is or is not decent (similar to what is or is not pornography).

5/3/2009 2:36:56 PM

Quote :

"All those tribes where women can walk around naked and the men aren't that distracted."

Its worth noting that those tribes are still... well, tribes... where as the societies of covered nipples have moved up in the world.

Still, if you're hellbent on FDT probably your best way is to get a mass of folks together and do it all at once. Preferably somewhere near the legislature, though I'm sure you'd get a better turn out somewhere on campus. Just maybe not the turn out you're hoping for.

Quote :

"To answer your question: do you have the time and money to make this an issue in the courts? Can you create a circumstance that would allow yourself to 'make a stand'? "

This as well. There probably isn't any way to do this without getting arrested, because otherwise all you're doing is protesting societal norms which neither the legislature or the courts can do shit about. You need to get arrested or at least oppressed by the government and bring a civil rights case.

[Edited on May 3, 2009 at 2:40 PM. Reason : asdf]

5/3/2009 2:37:45 PM

I'd rather see the law changed to make men put shirts back on just so i don't have to see all them disgusting ass girls with their boobs and guts hanging out

5/3/2009 2:52:14 PM

Organize a nude event (a festival at Moore Square or something). When you file for a permit and are turned down, sue the city on First Amendment grounds.

5/3/2009 3:04:28 PM

^^That's actually the most legitimate point, in my opinion. I mean, there are a lot of guys you probably don't want to see with their shirts off either, but we're already used to that. The majority of women are overweight, unattractive, old, or some combination of the three, and in those cases, freeing of said titties would not be a step forward.

[Edited on May 3, 2009 at 3:06 PM. Reason : ]

5/3/2009 3:06:00 PM

I would suggest you stick it to the man and post topless in this thread.

We're behind you 100%.

5/3/2009 3:12:39 PM

Law unfortunately operates more subjectively than we’d like to think. And changing the law isn’t as simple as suing for equal rights by pointing out an inconstancy in the law to get it fixed. Suing before public opinion is in the right place & you aren’t likely to achieve much & may just create more legal precedents going in the opposite direction of what you're aiming for.

Your immediate goal can't be to fix the law, that has to be a long term goal over a period of many years, the immediate goal can only be something like organizing an event to nudge public opinion along, or to volunteer for a campaign with a candidate who is sympathetic to your cause. The idealistic long term goal can be what motivates you, but your focus should be on a series of more practical & achievable goals.

Organizing an annual across-campus topless jog that has an emphasis on not being ashamed of your body & being comfortable enough "exposing" yourself to get mammograms might not get all bad press. You could invite men & women, and have the topless part be the participant’s option. It could be a jog across campus and you could try to get groups interested in allowing breast-feeding in public, and other equal rights for women groups involved. I know some colleges have nude runs yearly that get overlooked by the authorities as far as arrests go, and lots of charities & causes have annual runs or walks for their cause, so this could be an interesting way of combining the two so long as the organizers kept it tasteful & respectful.

I’m not advocating any specific action mentioned above, I’m just saying for any cause you’re passionate about, start with something you know you can achieve & build on it.

5/3/2009 3:30:32 PM

Public breastfeeding is already legal:

Quote :

" Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a woman may breast feed in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether the nipple of the mother's breast is uncovered during or incidental to the breast feeding."

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-190.9.html

5/3/2009 3:52:04 PM

Quote :

"I would suggest you stick it to the man and post topless in this thread. We're behind you 100%."

5/3/2009 3:53:23 PM

^^l
Even though this is allowed I think women should still practice some manners and etiquette even if they are just breast feeding their baby. For example I do not wear an old t-shirt or make a loud fart at a fancy restaurant; so I do not expect to see some 200 lb behemoth pulling her saggy tits out in the table in front of me to feed her baby while i eat my $30 steak.

[Edited on May 3, 2009 at 8:08 PM. Reason : j]

5/3/2009 8:08:12 PM

I don't know that I have ever seen a 200lb behemoth when I've been out fine dining, much less one that is dragging the infant with them.



[Edited on May 3, 2009 at 9:07 PM. Reason : .]

5/3/2009 9:04:47 PM

he thinks his golden corral piece of beef is like a $30 steak

that's where the confusion lies

5/3/2009 9:08:25 PM

I think step 1 certainly involves freeing dem tittays

5/3/2009 9:12:33 PM

I don't want to be made to put on a shirt

5/3/2009 10:15:11 PM

Quote :

"All those tribes where women can walk around naked and the men aren't that distracted."

Most men aren't distracted by tits which haven't seen a bra in 20 years. This isn't an unexpected phenomenon.


A lot of these tribes also practice genital mutilation, so lets run with that one too.

5/3/2009 10:26:39 PM

Quote :

"I would suggest you stick it to the man and post topless in this thread."

How would this help her take off her shirt in public without getting harassed? The "OMG b00bz!" attitude strikes me as part of the problem.

5/3/2009 11:19:06 PM

you're right.

we should all include topless pics as we post.

5/3/2009 11:22:40 PM

i think we can pretty much all agree that there's nothing sexual about a dude's nips

5/3/2009 11:35:40 PM

you can start by posting topless pics?

5/3/2009 11:50:14 PM

^^ I think not.

Quote :

"Among the men, about 52 percent reported that nipple stimulation increased their arousal, while about 40 percent indicated that if already aroused such stimulation would arouse them more."

http://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/b/sex-derogatis/4561/nipple-stimulation-arousing-for-men-too/

5/4/2009 1:21:32 AM

Male secondary sexual traits are different from female ones.

Whether or not that should dictate public exposure laws is a question that perhaps should be discussed, but I think it bears mentioning that male breasts are functionally and aesthetically different from female ones. This is a point that I think a number of people -- including the OP -- seem to have glossed over.

The male breast is not the same as the female breast, any more than the clitoris is the same as the penis. I don't necessarily think one is "dirtier" than the other, but they're not the same.

My personal feeling is that there is no logical reason for male and female nipples to be treated differently. But in governing human affairs, logical processes only go so far. The liberation of the female breast is not, to me, an issue that warrants immediate concern. As such I will not go to any effort to change the status quo.

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 4:27 AM. Reason : In fairness, there's no real logical reason why anybody has to wear pants (skirts, etc)]

5/4/2009 4:27:23 AM

i don't mean dudes getting their jollies all hard because of getting their nips rubbed.

i mean, how many girls look at a dude's nipples and have any sort of sexual response?

5/4/2009 8:19:20 AM

I get aroused at seeing a man's pec's, if he's got nice ones. And I doubt many men get aroused at looking at flat chested women, nipples exposed or not.

5/4/2009 8:50:22 AM

Quote :

"And I doubt many men get aroused at looking at flat chested women, nipples exposed or not."

Why the fuck would you think that?

Quote :

" http://www.flatchestedcoeds.com/ http://www.flatchestedgirls.com/ http://www.ittybittyteentitties.com/ http://www.eroticsmalltits.com/ http://www.smallboobsbeauties.com/ http://www.erospornlinks.com/small-tits/ http://ilovesmalltits.com/ http://smalltitshunter.com/ http://mytinytits.com/"

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 9:01 AM. Reason : let me google that for you]

5/4/2009 8:53:59 AM

Isn't there still a major glass ceiling and serious wage discrimination against women? Surely there is a better cause to get excited about.

I do agree however, that our country puts way too much stigma on sexuality and not enough stigma on violence. But I"m sure this has been discussed into the ground.

5/4/2009 9:37:26 AM

Quote :

"I would suggest you stick it to the man and post topless in this thread. We're behind you 100%."

5/4/2009 10:24:20 AM

Quote :

"Isn't there still a major glass ceiling and serious wage discrimination against women? Surely there is a better cause to get excited about."

No

5/4/2009 10:35:48 AM

Did you mean yes?

Quote :

"The ratio of women’s to men’s median weekly earnings for full-time workers was 79.9 in 2008, the third consecutive decline since the historical high of 81.0 in 2005. Another measure of the earnings gap, the ratio of women’s and men’s median annual earnings, was 77.8 for full-time, year-round workers in 2007 (data for 2008 are not yet available), up from 76.9 in 2006."

http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/C350.pdf

5/4/2009 10:52:44 AM

i meant no.

i'm not arguing that an inequality exists in wages, but it does so for a reason and is not necessarily attributed to all out discrimination. for these reasons i consider it a No since I do not find it an issue of major concern.

Moreover income statistics are often slanted because they exist to make a point.

in fact I had never heard of the study below, and found most of the information I just read in it to be common sense, but perhaps this will lay it out for you clearly.

Quote :

"The "Choice" Theory There have been studies published which have shown that once variables have been removed, pay for men and women with the same experience and education is virtually identical[4]. This has highly advanced the argument that the pay disparity exists due to different choices and values that men and women consider in their careers - men routinely accept more dangerous and higher paying careers than women while women typically choose to devote a substantial amount of their career path time to families and parenting (mommy track). Similarly, men are more willing to travel or relocate, take less time off, and work more hours per week.[5] This is the point of view espoused in "The Wage Gap Myth" and in a recent installment of John Stossel's "Give Me a Break" and described in more detail in the follow-up reference "'Gender Pay Gap' is pap". The 'choice' theory is explored from a practical point of view in Warren Farrell's book "Why Men Earn More" (The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap - and What Women Can Do About It). Farrell has advocated the idea that "the power of money is not in its earning but in its spending", and has thus emphasized the fact that American women account for 80+% of consumer discretionary spending, which points to the existence of a massive transfer of wealth from men to women that is entirely overlooked by all studies based only on the analysis of wages. Proponents of the 'choice' theory argue that if employers were allowed to pay women with the same experience and education as men much less than men, then employers would disproportionately hire women to increase profits.[6] An April 15, 2005 article titled "Gender Wage Gap Is Feminist Fiction" from the libertarian Independent Women's Forum states, "A study of the gender wage gap conducted by economist June O' Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found that women earn 98% of what men do when controlled for experience, education, and number of years on the job."[7]"

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 12:15 PM. Reason : sTUFF]

5/4/2009 12:05:42 PM

uh - please call me with details of when and where this large group of naked women will be

5/4/2009 12:19:01 PM

Sigh. Even if you provided citation rather than just people that agree with you, I'd doubt I'd care enough to look it up. I can "remove the variables" and "control for" any sorts of variables to modify data in any way that I want to prove a whatever point I want.

This thread and the resultant sub-topics are stupid. If it's just a tits or gtfo thread then move this shit to chit chat.

5/4/2009 1:15:37 PM

Any study that compares average salaries for all jobs is pointless. The only way to properly measure for a wage gap is to compare men and women with equal credentials in the same position.

5/4/2009 1:18:33 PM

^exactly. hence the need to remove the variables, which appears to be a point ^^ fails to acknowledge.

5/4/2009 1:31:27 PM

Quote :

"tits or gtfo"

5/4/2009 1:49:08 PM

Online High-Five!

Regarding the "men take more dangerous jobs than women and that's why they make more" bullshit:

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/1999/Oct/wk1/art02.htm

Quote :

"In sum, the duties most highly valued by the marketplace are generally cognitive or supervisory in nature. Job attributes relating to interpersonal relationships do not seem to affect wages, nor do the attributes of physically demanding or dangerous jobs."

And I've tried hard to find the data that

Quote :

"A study of the gender wage gap conducted by economist June O' Neill"

is based on, but all I see are a bunch of libertarian blogs that reference it.

Also calling bullshit on:

Quote :

"and has thus emphasized the fact that American women account for 80+% of consumer discretionary spending, which points to the existence of a massive transfer of wealth from men to women that is entirely overlooked by all studies based only on the analysis of wages."

As none of the expenditure data found at:
http://www.bls.gov/cex/#tables
have anything broken out by gender.

See how I link to the data that supports my claims? Neat, huh?

5/4/2009 1:57:25 PM

I always assumed it was entirely legal for women to go topless like men.

This blows my mind.

Also, tits or gtfo.

5/4/2009 2:04:28 PM

anyone ever do a study on how much the average man spends on the average women? Who knows it might be that missing 25 cents people talk about for every 1.00 made for a man .75 for a woman.

But I digress, I am not sure there is a way to get people accustomed people to topless women. And I am sure you will get unlikely opponents like topless business owners and obvious ones like the "think of the children" crowd. And IMO desexualizing boobs will be about as hard as stopping racism. But Supplanter's ideas have the most merit.

5/4/2009 2:05:55 PM

Quote :

"See how I link to the data that supports my claims? Neat, huh?"

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/pdf/tabc-4.pdf

Its only recently that women have caught up with men in the number of degrees attained in science and engineering. However, in Engineering and Computer Science (aka where da money at) there are still huge imbalances (about 4:1 in both cases)

So theres some proof of "women dont like the jobs men do". Why thats the case i have no idea. We can always use more women in comp sci.

Add to this the fact that in order to get into upper management (in a decent company) someone is going to need experience in the given field. Since the ammount of male engineers outnumber the ammount of female engineers, it makes sense that there would be more male engineers in management rolls.

What we need to see now is a comparison of the wages for male and female engineers in similar jobs. Perhapse broken down by years on the job.

5/4/2009 2:47:37 PM

^ hmm i have never thought about it like that.. good point

5/4/2009 2:52:02 PM

Ask and ye shall receive:
http://www.glassdoor.com/blog/2009/03/engineering-pay-gap-glassdoor-reveals-many-women-engineers-earn-less-than-men/

What? The gap actually widens as years of experience increase? Is your mind blown yet?

Granted, it is from a blog, so the cited data isn't handily available.

5/4/2009 3:01:54 PM

Upon reading further I found the data is pulled from the site itself, from surveys glassdoor.com ran. It's way more than a blog. Reading is fundamental.

5/4/2009 3:33:42 PM

interesting stat... for me at least.

and the answer to this inequality is....

Quote :

"first being able to determine whether or not inequity exists. This is extremely difficult today and why contributing anonymously on Glassdoor can help bring gaps to light and ensure pay – if all things (education, experience, performance) are equal — is more equitable around the globe. Stay tuned for tips from Glassdoor.com career expert and former HR executive on how to raise inequity concerns."

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 3:36 PM. Reason : the last paragraph is worth reading on that article. it is basically the argument within this thread]

5/4/2009 3:33:43 PM

^^^

What job is it? Saying 'engineer' is like saying 'chef' or 'pilot'. It gives little information.

That graph doesnt really account for the demographics of specific jobs. Some engineering jobs pay more than others; maybe there is a connection.

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 3:37 PM. Reason : ^^^]

5/4/2009 3:36:45 PM

Well considering the total is 4700 reports, I'd doubt if you broke it down to individual job title you'd get meaningful data. I don't think there is a report that is broken down by:

-Gender
-Years of experience
-Specific job
-Relevant skills or specialization.

WTF do you mean the "demographics of specific jobs". They surveyed 4700 people that selected "Engineering" as their field. What factors are you referring to? You think that programmer women get paid more, but QA women do not?

*EDIT* OHHHHH, I GET IT. You think that even in engineering, women are choosing to take the lower paying jobs.

[Edited on May 4, 2009 at 3:44 PM. Reason : .]

5/4/2009 3:43:12 PM